linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the overlayfs tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:40:38 +0100
From:   David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com, Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the overlayfs tree

Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

>  /* These sb flags are internal to the kernel */
>  #define MS_SUBMOUNT     (1<<26)
> -#define MS_NOREMOTELOCK	(1<<27)
>  #define MS_NOSEC	(1<<28)
>  #define MS_BORN		(1<<29)
>  #define MS_ACTIVE	(1<<30)

Ummm...  Can MS_NOREMOTELOCK be removed?  I know it's listed in the internal
flags section, but all of these have been exposed to userspace for over a
year.  Ideally, I'd remove all of these from UAPI, but can anyone guarantee
that no pieces of userspace refer to them?

David